Discussion Board 10

Write a response paper to the Frederick Douglass piece. Compare the Douglass autobiography with past readings such as written declarations like the “UDHR” or Nussbaum’s capability list. Think about questions such as which genre is more effective to convey the message? Do these writings target different audiences?

Advertisements

Share this:

Like this:

17 Responses to Discussion Board 10

Chapter one of Frederick Douglass’ autobiography briefly describes himself, and the cruelty that he witnessed in his youth. And compared to the past readings which are both lists of something, this reading is a story of one’s life, a part of his memory based on a real event. Since the readings’ genres are different, they target different audiences and different purposes. Douglass’ autobiography shares a story from experience rather than giving a set of codes to follow like the UDHR or proposing the idea of human capabilities like the Nussbaum’s list. And in giving the feel of cruel treatment based on race is best carried out by Douglass’ autobiography, describing an actual event that took place through detailed descriptions.

In the chapter of Frederick Douglass’ autobiography, the author is doing his self-report and explaining what he lived before when he was young. It’s kind of giving briefly on his lifestyle and memories based on true story. While the past two readings are listing the human rights and their capabilities in the specific purpose. It means that these two readings ‘UDHR” and Human capabilities are happening in some countries and will continue to happen, it is a direction and an obligation that it should be applied in all over the world. However, Frederick Douglass has already happened in the past. He experienced what his life was about.

The autobiography of Frederick Douglass is a very different kind of document in comparison to the UDHR and Martha Nussbaum’s Human Rights and Capabilities. While Douglass, in his writing, shares his personal experiences and the injustices he faced as a young man, the UDHR and Nussbaum’s piece have a very different purpose as stated above. Personally, I think Douglass’ piece is more effective in conveying a message due to the fact that it is someone’s personal story and it is very distinct and descriptive while UDHR and Human Capabilities are just stating what our rights and capabilities are. In addition, the audience of these two pieces are people all around the world, but Douglass’ autobiography is targeted towards a relatively smaller audience.

Fredrick Douglass’ autobiography serves a different but at the same time a similar purpose as the UDHR or Nussbaum’s Human Rights and Capabilities. Douglass is simply telling the story of his life and all the injustices he faced and the hardships of his time as a slave. Of course during his time as a slave many of the codes that were stated in the UDHR, of basic human rights, were broken. He was not treated as a human during his time as a slave and therefore pretty much all of the rights that were stated in the past two readings were broken. Fredrick Douglass’ autobiography is aimed towards a smaller audience because if someone were to read his autobiography the reader would have to have some interest in that time period or about slavery. His stories will evoke a greater response to the violation of human rights because he is giving specific stories and you become attached to Douglass. While the UDHR and Human Rights and Capabilities are just lists of things that should be followed but are not always obeyed. The UDHR could reach a more broad audience because it is simple to read and is not really specific so there does not really have to be a huge interest in a specific subject.

While Frederick Douglass wrote a story of his life, the UDHR and the Martha Nussbaum’s Huamn Capabilities are more like an academic piece. It is possible for people to perceive Douglass’s writing more effective, as it is written based upon someone’s first-person experience. The other difference is that Frederick Douglass’s early life was completely different from what is dictated by the UDHR and the Martha Nussbaum’s Human Capabilities. As he started his life as a slave, he witnessed many cruel situations. He didn’t get the education and the care that were stated in the UDHR and the Martha Nussbaum’s writing.

The autobiography written by Frederick Douglass was a piece explaining his life experiences while growing up as a slave. The piece “UDHR” and “Nussabaum’s Capability list” were all written as a purpose to educate the uneducated who never knew about these experiences. I think that Frederick’s piece would be more effective when trying to convey a message because I feel like hearing and relating to someone’s experiences is more effective than just reading an academic work.

I think the “UDHR” and Frederick Douglass are pretty much similar subject that trying to explain point. It could be focus on different audiences, because UDHR is more likely research paper we would never go through it, unless we have to read it for some proper reasons. But the Frederick Douglass piece is something I would read over it quickly to see what situation that he has been, so as my view point it is more likely something I would want to see and read it, so I think the Frederick’s piece will be more effectively come to me.

The autobiography written by Douglass was a more effective way in my opinion to convey a message. I think channeling personal experiences and using emotion to connect to the reader captures more attention than a list (UDHR) or Nussbaum’s factual piece was capable of. I enjoyed this reading more than the others simply because it was a personal narrative of events. It was certainly more interesting and first hand accounts are more impressionable on readers than facts when forming an opinion on something.

After reading the first chapter of Fredrick Douglas’s autobiography, compared to UDHR, I think Douglas’s narrative is a more effective way of conveying a message; His personal encounters of the cruelty of slavery are more moving and detailed than just a Declaration with general statements. Reading Douglas’s story makes you consider the pre-justices in this world and how far we’ve come. Where the UDHR states the rights we all should have, the narrative can be more effective in that the story can move readers in different ways, causing each reader to think in a different aspect of how we can address some of these issues which still occur today.

The three passages all hover over similar field of ideas – humanity. However, they simultaneously differ in the audience they target and the ideas inside humanity. Nussbaum’s passage talks about the well-being of the people where the UDHR states the “rules” or the rights that a human being possesses. Douglass’ article shares the same field of ideas, but specifically focuses on the topic of slavery. While other passages are very formal in describing its topic, Douglass’ piece is rather informal and takes the style of storytelling – making the piece easier to follow and understand. Other writings are very succinct in describing its ideas, but Douglass’ piece, with its detailed descriptions on the conditions, helps in visualizing the situations at the time and help better understand what it was like. For a passage to be effective in conveying the message, I believe the writing has to be succinct and be an easy-read. Although all writings were effective in delivering its messages, Douglass’ style seemed to be the most effective as it had detailed descriptions and at the same time does not let go of being an easy read.

The first chapter of Fredrick Douglas’s Autobiography is a very descriptive and graphically written. It provide a vivid recollection of his past, his emotions, his anxiety, his fear, his childhood. The autobiography can easily move it’s readers and make one with “humane” heart sympathize with him. It would certainly make one question the right’s of humanity, what rights should each of us wield. I think Fredrick Douglas’s autobiography definitely is very effective in getting the message across to the readers but each of the different article that was assign to us to read had their own audiences and strength. I think this autobiography is very suitable for general public, the “UDHR” is very condense and open to some degree of interpretation which is suitable to use a guide to countries as a reference and the Nussbaum’s capability list is written to address the people which are interested or are in the field of human rights and to debate which is a better guideline to use as the “UDHR”.

Chapter one of the Frederick Douglas piece gives a overview of his life when he was growing up as a slave. This gives a more personal reading or the readers and can draw more people’s attention. The “UDHR” is more objective and gives more room to interpret the meanings of each statement. Audiences can take these statements ore personal than other due to that exact fact. These two documents target different audiences because Frederick Douglas’s piece targets those who have not always been given equal opportunities while the “UDHR” targets everyone.

Both Fredrick Douglas autobiography and the “UDHR” serve a similar purpose in the fact that They both identify curruptions and civil well being of all humans alike. They both take very different actions to do so in their writings. Starting with the auto biography of Fredrick Douglas, he shows the reader the horrific events he witnessed happening to young people and the lack of rights to these young men. In comparison to the Douglas autobiography the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a more direct approach with solutions to social and humans injustices . I believe that Fredrick Douglas conveys his message of social injustices because of his personal experiences to me are more impacting than rules to follow.

The autobiography by Frederick Douglass was written with real experience and personal feelings. Compare to the previous article that we read, UDHR was written in a more straightforward texture. I think both pieces convey the message pretty effective, but in different ways. UDHR gives a clearer information by just listing all the human rights; the autobiography by Frederick Douglass explains more in detail, he used his personal experience to express the need of basic human rights and the consequences to human when there were no basic life secure in the society. Both genres target different audience. The audience would be easier convince with the genre that they favor.

Both articles have similar purposes. Both articles about humanity in our society. However, each articles have different audience they target. I think that “UDHR” talks about the rights everyone should have.While,Chapter one of the Frederick Douglass piece is more personal compare to “UDHR” and focused on slavery. I think Frederick Douglass piece is more effective to convey the message to audience. Audience will interest more in Fredrick Douglass piece due to it’s personal story of his life. Compare to “UDHR”, Fredrick Douglass piece is more easy to read and understand.

The first chapter of fredrick douglas addresses the horrid nature of slavery and the injustice of that particular society. This narrative has the same use as the prior two writings, they all try and avoid injustices and set straight equality and peace. i feel that this narrative excerpt does a better job in displaying unjust behavior and pressing the issue of what needs to be avoided. because the portrayal of douglas experience of slavery is so real it almost hits hoome to the reader and makes them feel almost responsible. in feeling this way i feel that the reader will feel stronger towards taking progressive action than readings that are talking to an entire group of people. its almost psychological in the way that when someone addresses an entire group saying not to do something you wont really feel the need to take action where as when someone talks directly to you it has a more profound effect.

Frederick Douglass’s Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass would be in the genre of autobiography. What it tells is the story of his younger life. It is considered a primary source because it is a first hand account of the life and experiences of an African-American slave in the 19th century and what he came to do. It’s purpose is to inform an audience about Douglass’s life and give an idea of the historical context through his experiences and thoughts. It definitely succeeds in effectively conveying it’s message. The UDHR is a document of declaration. Like the autobiography, the UDHR is a primary source and can have historical context. It doesn’t necessarily share the same audience, although, they can be considered to have similar audiences. What the UHDR does is make a declaration to establish certain points. It has a different purpose and just has a direct message that it conveys, which it does effectively.